In his introduction, he talked vaguely about himself giving some basic background information. He was born in Washington DC, and learnt his first Art lessons from his father who was a photographer. Leonardo da Vinci’s Mona Lisa was the first “real” painting he saw, and as a result, he went to see the painting six other times. I wonder what he meant by “real” in regards to the painting? Could it be that he had viewed various paintings in print and had not seen the actual genuine artwork?
Nickolson went on to add that his absolute favorite painting is Girl with Red Hat by Johannes Vermeer. Although he did not explain why, he said “If you can’t do it, do it big, if not paint it red.” Whilst viewing the painting, some of the visual analysis I made included; firstly the outrageous red hat is the primary object that grabs my attention; secondly, my eyes moved to the blue robe she is wearing, and as a result, I can identify that the two colors (warm hue) seem to contrast strongly with the softened (cool hue) background. Moreover, it appears that the use of color creates an intimate mood of Vermeer’s work, which is confirmed by the girl’s direct gaze enabling communication directly with the viewer.
Nickolson separated the rest of his presentation and lecture into four parts. The first part was “How to tell a War Story.” In this section, he discussed being drafted to Cambodia on June 18th 1969. During his journey’s, he took a variety of photographs, and the one he showed was of a temple that is believed to be over two hundred years. His other sets of photographs were of the people, as a result screening to us the different cultures within the country. The use of both images and the stories he shared, allowed the audience to not only see but hear and learn about his encounters as a Vietnam War Artist.
“Ceramic Projects” was the third part of his talk, and it was full of elements that really grabbed my attention. This is because he discussed developments of new ideas using cubes to build structures, which also enabled him new ways of seeing. Nickolson also used other shapes such as, squares and cylinders in his painting Cathedral at Night which he described as chocolate with white chips.
The concluding part “Themes and Variations,” I felt as if he went through quite quickly. He mentioned Britain and France and the use of ink and brush wash which resulted in quick drawings. Richard Nickolson lecture was not what I expected. My expectations based on the title of his lecture “Self Portrait,” were of Nickolson showing various portraits of him or of what represents him using different art forms such as, painting and drawing based on his current role as a professor of painting and drawing at the Indiana University-Purudue University. Moreover, I feel as if I did not get much knowledge from this lecture apart from now being able to identify one of Johannes Vermeer paintings.
I also attended Richard Emory Nickleson's talk entitled Self-Portrait. I went into the talk with mixed feelings. I had seen the picture chosen to advertize his work and I was skeptical. The shapes and colored lines arranged in what seemed to me to be haphazard way of covering up a rather nice looking silhouette of what looked to me like a water tower.
ReplyDeleteUpon arriving at the lecture he was introduced and told us, he was going to combine words and art. He used other’s words to describe some of what he felt, saw, and experienced. I found him difficult to understand, he seemed nervous or distracted by something.
His lecture was split into four parts all dealing with different aspects of his life. His first section dealt with the Vietnam War and his time as an artist there. He was allowed to use any medium he wanted to portray the war; he just was not allowed to keep it. All of his work became property of the United States Government, some of it was destroyed and the rest of it is located in a basement archive.
In the second section, he spoke about his work with barns and simple structures. He went to many different places and drew pictures of what he saw, sometimes from many different angles.
His third section was devoted to his foray into three-dimensional ceramic art. He paired his ceramic pieces with pieces of his art.
His fourth section tied it all together and showed his most recent works which I found to be very abstract.
I am not sure what I was supposed to get out of his lecture other than he is a versatile artist. By looking at the body of his work, I could tell that.